Understand Your Rights. Solve Your Legal Problems
As it becomes increasingly competitive to win leads, effective PR and marketing are crucial for firms to stand out. However, it can often be difficult for lawyers to justify spending their time on PR and personal branding when they have casework to do. Yet, engaging with press at consumer publications is still essential for winning new customers and simple techniques such as sharing legal comments on trending news, TV shows or celebrities can be an effective way to raise the profile of both yourself and your firm.
“Personal branding” is a buzzword that is tossed around the internet these days, but the value of a well maintained online profile should not be underestimated. From raising your own personal profile within the industry to generating more leads for your firm, personal branding is an effective marketing technique that could enhance both yours and your firm's reputation, if managed properly. Nicola Kenyon, PR Manager at leading medical negligence firm Patient Claim Line, explains the value of personal branding and shares tips on how to achieve success with your own personal brand below.
For lawyers operating in more traditional consumer-facing law, it can be difficult to find the right balance between positioning your firm as authoritative as well as approachable. Trust and approachability are values that law firms often struggle to translate to their customers. A recent report published on the Law Society revealed that the general public often see lawyers as ‘arrogant, disinterested or unapproachable’ .
Personal branding could offer a manageable, modern way to break down the barrier between consumers and legal teams. By maintaining a personal brand online, such as through releasing comments to newspapers or even maintaining a social media account dedicated to legal advice, lawyers can offer a more approachable face within the firm.
Personal branding could offer a manageable, modern way to break down the barrier between consumers and legal teams.
You may be widely recognised as an expert within your field of law, but a potential customer or lead may not recognise you as such based on industry qualifications or accreditations that they are unfamiliar with. So in this instance, a strong personal brand on social media and popular news sites could offer a ‘way in’ with potential customers. For example, at Patient Claim Line, we regularly monitor news trends to identify opportunities for our lawyers to comment on popular news topics. Our legal team commented on a medical negligence storyline in Coronation Street which was covered by the Express and a series of other national news sites, and we received a number of website visits from new users as well as inquiries after publication of the story. Newsjacking allowed us to reach out to a wider audience who may not even be looking for, or know that they need legal representation.
In the age of fake news, internet scams and social media ‘experts’ pedaling poor advice, trust signals are becoming increasingly important for businesses. But whilst awards, accreditations and qualifications are important stamps to have within the industry, they’re often not as obvious trust signals for customers. However, mainstream media offers the opportunity to create trust signals with news outlets that consumers trust, for example through sharing a lawyer’s expertise with the BBC or magazines that are read by your target market.
[ymal]
Social media platforms play an important role in how people consume information and should not be neglected in your marketing efforts. A study by communications firm Edelman found that 41% of users still trust information on social media. According to a 2018 Ofcom report, 44% of adults cite social media as their first point of call for news and information, and whilst users today may be more inclined to research information themselves than take it at face value, having visibility in this platform is still important. By investing in spokespeople for your firm, or your own personal branding, firms can have an authoritative, genuine position on these platforms to share credible information and expertise.
Whilst investing in personal branding can do a lot for the firm that lawyers work at, its main goal is to raise the profile of the individual - an area that will be of increasing importance for lawyers personally. A strong personal profile within the media will bring in more leads, which will raise a lawyer’s reputation with the board, their colleagues and the industry overall.
Individuals and businesses across the UK are struggling financially due to COVID-19. As time presses on, the far-reaching consequences of this are becoming ever clearer. One area of concern is the effect this could have on divorced couples who either rely on or are obliged to make maintenance payments such that one party can make ends meet. People who receive maintenance are worried about what will happen if those payments stop or if they need more money to meet their expenses in these uncertain times. Those who make maintenance payments are worried about what should happen if they can no longer afford to pay. Moore Blatch's Sahil Aggarwal dissects the uncertainty around these payments below.
As we’re regularly reminded, beating this pandemic will be a ‘marathon and not a sprint’ so people aren’t just looking at their finances now, they are looking at how they may survive in the months to come.
So, what is the situation for those whom COVID-19 directly impacts on spousal maintenance?
Even when the court has ordered individuals to pay maintenance to their ex-spouse, the very fact this order has been made means that those income claims are still ‘live’, allowing the court to make further orders if and when necessary. The court is therefore bound to consider changes in circumstances since the original order. This does not mean that those individuals need to rely on the court, but it leaves the door wide open to re-negotiate the level and term of maintenance payable.
The court is therefore bound to consider changes in circumstances since the original order.
If an individual can no longer make the maintenance payments required under any given order as a result of the pandemic, for example because they have been made redundant or furloughed, then this might justify temporarily decreasing or ceasing maintenance. On the other hand, if an individual is struggling to meet their own outgoings as a result of the pandemic, perhaps because their own income has been curtailed, then this could give rise for any maintenance to be varied upwards.
People may ask why their ex-spouse would ever agree to any change at all, but legal costs are treated differently when dealing with a variation of maintenance which should incentivise them to reach a sensible agreement. If an ex-spouse turns down what a court might consider a very reasonable offer, especially under the current circumstances, then they could be at serious risk of paying the legal costs for taking the matter back to court.
Any necessity to vary maintenance as a result of COVID-19 may in fact be an opportunity to settle matters once and for all. An ex-spouse might feel more inclined to accept a one-off lump sum payment in lieu of maintenance rather than dealing with any variation. This in turn will bring any maintenance claims to a permanent end. One point to consider is that the pandemic is certainly going to make some people much more risk averse which means an ex-spouse might be much more willing to accept a one-off lump sum payment rather than risk the uncertainty that comes with future maintenance payments in the current climate.
[ymal]
The coronavirus pandemic means we are living in extremely uncertain times, with some people feeling much harder done by than others. This will mean that, for better or for worse, some spousal maintenance payments will need to be reviewed.
Maintaining as much activity as possible, ensuring that the company will still be there after the sanitary crisis, saving jobs, dealing with the business partners, managing cash flow: these are the top concerns of companies today. Another one should, however, be on their mind: protecting themselves against future litigation. The States, employees, consumers, business partners are currently animated by goodwill and a focus on dealing through these unprecedented times as well as possible. History has nevertheless showed that litigation is never far off. Sylvie Gallage-Alwis, Partner at Signature Litigation, offers Lawyer Monthly her thoughts on the risk of legal action faced by companies operating during the COVID-19 pandemic, using France as a case study.
When it comes to litigation that may affect companies which keep on doing business during this period, employee-related litigation is central.
Looking at France, the main risk relates to employees developing the disease and filing a gross negligence claim. This applies to other countries too as the first wrongful death, linked to the death of a Walmart employee, was also filed in the United States. In France, the French government expressly stated that "the employer's liability for its non-compliance with this specific obligation to prevent occupational risks can be sought" and that "regardless of the situation, complying with this specific obligation or, on the contrary, not complying with it, are not presumed (except in very rare cases) and must be proven, in the event of a dispute". This statement has not been unnoticed by trade unions which have threatened numerous companies that their employees will file such claims. Such claims will be facilitated if the government agrees to list COVID-19 as an occupation disease. If this happens, there will be a presumption, which is almost impossible to overturn in practice, that will link the disease to the working conditions.
When it comes to litigation that may affect companies which keep on doing business during this period, employee-related litigation is central.
Some employees are also seeking liability on the ground of manslaughter (such as the employees of Amazon for instance). Here, the employee will have to demonstrate that the company breached a safety measure that caused a risk to the life of its employees. The types of protective measures implemented by the employer will therefore be scrutinised.
One can also fear cases relating to the anxiety of developing COVID-19, in a similar way as the litigation that arose relating to the exposure to asbestos. Pursuant to decisions dated 5 April 2019 (no. 18-17.442) and 11 September 2019 (no. 17-24.879 to 17-25.623), the Plenary Assembly of the French Supreme Court extended case law that was initially limited to workers potentially exposed to asbestos, to any worker exposed to a harmful product or substance. Here, all employees who did not develop COVID-19 but fear to do so could sue. In this instance, the employer must demonstrate that it complied with its safety obligation and provided protective measures as set out by the law.
Besides the actions of employees, companies also risk potential actions from third parties. This might be the case of a consumer who would act against a store who, according to the consumer, would not provide adequate protection, or the employees of transport or logistics companies or distributors in contact with the employees of the company in question. We are also seeing claims against jails on the ground that inmates started developing COVID-19 which would necessarily be linked to an outside contamination.
[ymal]
Class actions linked to how companies deal with refund or payment have also started over the world, with a starting point against cruise or hotel companies as well as against companies which provide memberships and have not suspended payments, in particular when governments were not yet sending strong or coherent messaging to the population. Lawsuits against some types of refund policies are starting as well, as well as against insurance coverage denials or limitations.
For the businesses exceptionally manufacturing products intended for the health and safety of the population (masks, antibacterial gel, overalls, ventilators) in order to help overcome the global shortage, there may be actions on the ground of product liability.
Finally, one cannot exclude contract liability between business partners who cannot fulfil their contractual obligations. An analysis of the case law relating to force majeure in the event of epidemics like Ebola, the Dengue fever, the H1N1 flu or the Chikungunya, does not provide much hope, at least in France. Indeed, the courts have either refused to take into account the concept of force majeure or denied the causal link between the pandemic and the non-performance claimed. This being said, there has never been any similar situation where States have taken measures to restrict freedoms.
An analysis of the case law relating to force majeure in the event of epidemics like Ebola, the Dengue fever, the H1N1 flu or the Chikungunya, does not provide much hope, at least in France.
The question will, therefore, be whether or not Courts will remember, when they will come to rule on these issues, that companies have faced an unprecedented crisis and actually helped States during it. It will be important to remind everyone of the solidarity that is currently taking place at every level.
Aziz Rahman of corporate crime solicitors Rahman Ravelli details the fraud risks posed to business by coronavirus and the ways such risks can be minimised.
At the time of writing, everyone is observing restrictions on their movements and many millions are either working from home or have stopped work altogether in an effort to stop the spread of COVID-19.
As a response to such a seismic blow to the economy, Chancellor Rishi Sunak announced huge packages of financial assistance last month in the shape of grants for the self-employed and payment of the wages of employed workers. Yet in announcing his help for the self-employed, the Chancellor acknowledged that such a scheme may be attractive to those looking to perpetrate fraud.
His statement was a recognition that whatever the health of an economy - or the financial standing of an individual or a company within it – there will always be those looking to make fraudulent gains. The situation that has been created by coronavirus will have produced new opportunities for those who commit fraud. And fraud is like a virus: it will spread and cause the maximum amount of harm unless the right precautions are taken. To paraphrase the criminologist Dr Donald Cressey, perceived financial need, opportunity and rationalisation all help promote fraud. With the current economic uncertainty, the chance for state financial hand-outs and the possibility that many may feel they should be getting something, all of Cressey’s conditions appear to be present.
The situation that has been created by coronavirus will have produced new opportunities for those who commit fraud.
That is the case when it comes to both the Chancellor’s attempts to help employees and the business world in general: new developments produce new fraud possibilities.
This is arguably why the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has gone to great lengths to warn that the present situation may be exploited by those looking to defraud, using anything from investment fraud and advance fee fraud through to clone firms. The FCA is urging those in business to use its Financial Services Register and its Warning List to check on the authenticity of any financial proposition made. Similarly, the National Crime Agency (NCA) is highlighting risks posed by the likes of bogus online medical equipment suppliers, fake HM Revenue and Customs, bank and loan company officials and computer hackers passing themselves off as software engineers. Companies could even find themselves being impersonated by those looking to make illegal gains.
It is now, therefore, arguably more important than ever to be alert to the risks. This means both having well thought-out and properly executed measures in place to prevent and / or identify fraud and responding promptly and appropriately if fraud is suspected.
A prompt, thorough internal investigation will always be the best way to establish if there has been fraud committed, why it happened and how to prevent repeat occurrences. This may, at first glance, appear difficult given current working restrictions. But it can be done with some “out of the box’’ thinking. Interviews, for example, could be conducted via telephone or video link; although consideration must be given to legal issues such as confidentiality and privilege in the jurisdictions where they are carried out. Document collection can be done remotely or by using an appropriate third party, providing all relevant data protection requirements are met. Once such an investigation has been completed, decisions then need to be made regarding whether its findings are shared internally and / or disclosed to the relevant regulatory agency.
[ymal]
It should at this point be emphasised that despite the unusual circumstances the law and the agencies that enforce it are still functioning; even if changes are being made. To give one significant example, while Business Secretary Alok Sharma has announced a temporary suspension of the wrongful trading provisions, the law in relation to fraudulent trading - and the potential for director disqualification – remains in place. It is a development that shows that while businesses’ current problems are being acknowledged by the government, companies cannot expect to be immune from either the dangers of fraud or the consequences of becoming involved in it.
Recent weeks have seen significant upheaval in the business world – and a clear possibility for those looking to commit fraud. But companies must ensure they do what they can to minimise the potential turmoil.
If you run a law firm, chances are you need SOC compliance. Nonetheless, complying with SOC 2 isn’t a mean feat. Getting the initial report alone requires significant time, resources, and effort. Often, many people think that SOC 2 compliance doesn’t apply to law firms. However, this isn’t the case because law firms collect huge volumes of data from their clients.
In today’s tech-savvy legal practice, firms have moved past storing client data in filing cabinets. Legal practitioners are increasingly leveraging the technology that is available to them, to store their clients’ data. With the ever-growing number of cyber-attacks, it’s imperative that you keep the data secure besides ensuring that it remains available. The data also needs to be kept confidential and processed with confidentiality.
If your law firm stores its data on the cloud, you’ll certainly need SOC 2 compliance. Unfortunately, many legal practitioners don’t know where or how to embark on their SOC 2 compliance journey. If you are caught up in this situation, you’ll need to be guided on how to effortlessly navigate the intricate world of SOC compliance.
The American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) established the SOC 2 auditing standard to test organisations’ internal controls regarding information security and privacy. By attaining compliance status, you’ll be informing your clients that they can trust your law firm to handle their data with utmost care and discretion.
SOC 2 compliance is relevant to all businesses that store customer data on the cloud. This standard isn’t just necessary for protecting your law firm and its clients from data breaches. It is also important for boutique law firms that are seeking to move upmarket.
By attaining compliance status, you’ll be informing your clients that they can trust your law firm to handle their data with utmost care and discretion.
Some lucrative clients will expect you to meet the same compliance standards as other vendors that they have. SOC 2 might be one of the requisite compliance requirements. Therefore, a savvy law firm should use SOC 2 as a competitive distinguisher since compliance proves that the firm is credible, established, and attuned to its customers’ needs.
For your law firm to become SOC 2 compliant, it needs to undergo an audit. Consequently, it will receive a report that highlights the quality of the controls that you have in place. The type and criteria of the trust services that you choose will determine the scope of your audit test.
Generally, SOC 2 reports test against five trust services criteria. These are confidentiality, privacy, security, availability, and processing integrity. Before engaging an auditor, you must decide which among the five criteria you’d like tested. You can also choose to have all the five trust services criteria tested.
The security criteria are mandatory in all SOC 2 assessments because it sets all-encompassing security standards for your law firm. It also overlaps the other criteria by setting controls for confidentiality, privacy, processing integrity, and availability. The security criteria ensures that your clients’ data and the systems that handle it are secure at all times.
The availability criteria ensure that your systems are not only secure but also available to clients to use whenever they expect to. It addresses network performance, security event handling, downtime, etc. It’s important to guarantee clients access to your services and their data at all times.
The confidentiality criteria are meant to ensure the utmost protection of confidential information that is in your law firm’s possession. If you agreed to keep some of your clients’ information confidential, this criteria is for you. The confidentiality criteria provide guidelines for the identification, protection, and destroying confidential information.
[ymal]
The privacy criteria entails the protection of clients’ personal data. These criteria determine whether your law firm effectively protects its clients’ personal information. It addresses how you collect, store, and handle personal information, including clients’ names, addresses, Social Security numbers, and any other identifying information.
The processing integrity criteria ensures that you are providing clients with the agreed-upon services in an accurate, timely, and authorized manner. This criterion addresses processing errors and the time that it takes to identify and fix them. It also addresses issues regarding the incident-free storage and preservation of data in your possession.
Thanks to the processing integrity criteria, you’ll be able to tell whether system inputs and outputs that you use are free from manipulation and unauthorised access. It demonstrates to clients that your data, processes, and systems are working as intended, and therefore, they shouldn’t worry about any inaccuracies, errors, or delays.
To make your law firm S0C 2-compliant, it’s advisable to engage a team of experts who will create protocols for compliance. The firm’s data will be monitored by experts who will also set up and responds to any security alerts. This way, it will be easy to distinguish real threats from false positives whenever an anomalous activity occurs. Working with SOC 2 compliance experts eases the compliance journey.
The coronavirus pandemic is posing huge challenges to every family. However, families based across more than one country will be facing particular difficulties. Hetty Gleave, Partner at Hunters Law LLP, explains to Lawyer Monthly the challenges that these families face.
Whilst the government has confirmed that transporting children between homes is permitted essential travel during the lockdown, this will not help international families, where children or parents regularly fly to or from the UK for contact.
And whilst the UK has not yet closed its borders, many other countries have done so, and there are now far fewer transport options with most international flights cancelled. Wealthy families with access to private jets may have more options, depending on where else they have bases. However, if the UK closes its borders they too will be affected. Even without a border closure, the government is advising against all but essential international travel, and families will choose to avoid international travel to reduce their risk of infection.
Where families are based across a number of jurisdictions, this may mean children being separated from parents, and potentially from siblings, for many months. In such cases, parents will need to make remote contact work. International families used to spending time abroad may be at an advantage here, with experience of staying in touch with family and friends remotely. Beyond video calls, online gaming, learning and watch parties can make remote contact a lot more fun for children.
Where families are based across a number of jurisdictions, this may mean children being separated from parents, and potentially from siblings, for many months.
In addition to remote contact, families should consider additional face-to-face contact once restrictions are eased, for example, additional time during the summer holidays.
Unfortunately some parents are likely to use the coronavirus as pretext for disrupting contact unnecessarily. For international families, where it's likely that face-to-face contact will not be possible, this is likely to take the form of frustrating remote contact – whether by not making the children available for agreed times, by refusing to agree times, or by distracting children when they're due to be spending virtual time with the other parent.
The judiciary has been clear that maintaining relationships between children and parents is particularly important at this uncertain time. For international families, this will almost certainly be through extensive and meaningful remote contact. If one parent is obstructing such contact from taking place, then this can be challenged through a court application, and the courts are continuing to operate, albeit remotely. It will be important to ascertain which country's courts have jurisdiction; the English courts will generally have jurisdiction if the child is habitually resident here.
[ymal]
Whilst the court is extremely unlikely to mandate contact that would require international travel, if one parent is preventing remote contact, a court order is likely to be appropriate. In practice, however, it is likely be difficult to get an early hearing date, where the courts are facing staff shortages and will need to prioritise the most serious welfare cases, such as where children are being abused. Whether a hearing can be obtained may depend on which region the children are based in, as different court regions have different capacities. Additionally, enforcement will in reality be challenging at this time.
Issues may also arise where applications and orders need to be served across borders, though courts are in any event increasingly permitting service by email or even social media, and would be expected to do so if the pandemic has made paper service abroad unrealistic.
The disruption of parent-child relationships during this emotionally challenging period poses a real risk of damaging that relationship, and where the court has capacity to accommodate a remote hearing, obtaining a judgment that one parent has been behaving unreasonably, and a Child Arrangements Order tailored to the current circumstances, requiring remote contact, may be powerful in sending a clear message to the other parent that unreasonably refusing to facilitate remote contact is never acceptable, and will be harmful to the child.
The disruption of parent-child relationships during this emotionally challenging period poses a real risk of damaging that relationship[...]
In some circumstances, arbitration is likely to be a pragmatic and helpful tool for parents unable to agree on the best arrangements for their children, and can, like court, hearings, it can take place remotely. Unlike court proceedings, however, it does, require both parties' agreement to the process, so may not assist where one party is being deliberately obstructive.
Whether an application is to be made or not, where one parent is unreasonably frustrating remote contact, it would be sensible to keep contemporaneous notes, supported by copies of relevant emails, texts, WhatsApp or other messages as evidence of what has taken place, in case a review of what happened to contact during the pandemic is required in future proceedings.
Any parent who abuses the pandemic to damage their child’s relationship with their other parent is likely to have a hard time in future persuading a court that they prioritise their child’s best interests, and this could limit the amount of time they are able to spend with their children going forward, or even result in a change of the child’s residence. The family judiciary have made their views clear in their guidance, and parents should think of the long term impact of ignoring that on both them and their children.
You might be wondering if the services of a lawyer are necessary if you were injured in an accident. Accidents can happen anytime, but if you sustained bodily injuries, you should consider consulting with a lawyer that specialises in personal injury cases.
A personal injury is a physical trauma or pain sustained by an individual following an accident or mishap. Some victims of accidents also suffer from mental and emotional anguish months or years after the incident happened. Most personal injury cases result from vehicular crashes, workplace accidents, as well as slip and trip incidents.
Some people who figure in an accident miss work time, sustain permanent physical disabilities and even develop psychological problems. But do all accident injuries require the services of a lawyer? How will you know if you need to consult with a lawyer specializing in accident injuries?
Most personal injury cases result from vehicular crashes, workplace accidents, as well as slip and trip incidents.
Although there are cases when you may not need the expertise of a lawyer, some accident injuries are too significant to handle on your own. There are various reasons why you should hire an injury lawyer:
Minor injuries usually do not need legal help since the victim may be able to process the insurance and legal claims by his or her own. Serious injuries, however, require medical treatment and hospitalization. Accident injuries that last more than a few days will warrant the services of an injury lawyer. Your lawyer will be responsible for evaluating the value of insurance and legal claims. With this, it is best to hire legal representation that knows the personal injury laws of the state where the accident happened.
If you sincerely believe the accident was caused by another person's or company's negligence, you should consult with a personal injury lawyer immediately. An injury attorney is the best professional to help prove your claim. Your lawyer will gather and preserve the crucial evidence to solidify your injury claims.
The responsible party and the insurance company may engage in tactics to make it seem like you are at fault. One of the best reasons to hire an accident injury lawyer is that someone who knows the law will represent you from filing an insurance claim or filing a court case. A personal injury lawyer is also willing to go to court for you, if necessary. Legal representation is a must when you are the party at fault, or the insurance firm is not taking your claims seriously.
[ymal]
Regular folks will likely have very little understanding of how to process a claim or negotiate a settlement. An attorney specialising in personal injury cases not only knows the ins and outs of claims processing, he or she also knows to evaluate the situation and the skills to negotiate. If you are not knowledgeable or comfortable in handling the injury settlement process, you should look for a reputable accident injury lawyer to do the hard work for you.
The good news is, the person or company responsible is willing to pay. But the bad news is, the insurance company is making an unreasonably low offer. Some may deploy insurance adjusters to negotiate with you. The truth is some insurance firms will do anything to pay you a small amount for the injuries and damages. The advantage of hiring a lawyer that handles injury cases is that the insurance company knows they cannot undermine your efforts to obtain proper compensation.
Being part of an accident takes a toll on the physical, mental, and emotional well-being of a person. It is never recommended to handle an accident injury case on your own. A reputable attorney will help you fight for your rights in seeking just compensation for your injuries. You benefit immensely in reaching out to a licensed personal injury lawyer near you for legal guidance.
The COVID-19 crisis has forced the legal industry to innovate overnight. Anna Simmonds, a barrister and Head of Commercial at Sparqa Legal, discusses what might be learned in this period and how it could reshape the legal landscape.
The LawTech industry has been talking about how law could be done differently for years; and structural change was afoot. HMCTS pledged £1.2bn to digitise hearings in 2016. The MOJ recently pledged £2m in funding to TechNation to promote the use of technology in the legal sector. The LawTech market was booming, with £1bn global investment in legal technology last year.
But despite increased buzz in the LawTech market, for many legal practitioners, ‘innovation’ had often felt like rather an abstract concept. Of course, pressure to be more efficient and meet growing customer expectations to utilise the latest technology has been very real; but there existed a dissonance between this and the pressure to crack on with the ‘day job’, meaning that for many, LawTech remained no more than a buzzword.
Then in March 2020, the world changed. COVID-19 has stopped us all in our tracks. Courtrooms stand empty as the justice system was advised to conduct as many hearings as possible using video and conference calls instead.
Even the most tech-phobic practitioners have been forced to look to innovative solutions to this unprecedented global crisis overnight as they adapt to providing legal services and hearings remotely.
The COVID-19 crisis has forced the legal industry to innovate overnight.
Larger law firms were already well equipped to deal with the challenges presented by the COVID-19 lockdown, with many LawTech tools already embedded across the firm. Smaller firms will have found they simply weren’t set up to deal with the risks remote casework and document management can present - security and privacy being the most obvious example.
Even firms with good infrastructure in place will still have had to grapple with the operational issues that present themselves with teams working remotely. Exceptionally good communication skills are required to keep everyone aligned and meeting targets from afar. Uncertainty and the impact this has on productivity has opened up a role for online team and leadership tools to handle the interpersonal side of running a legal business.
Some lawyers have responded very quickly to the changes: one example is Cloisters' chambers pilot initiative using remote video conferencing to deliver multi-party settlement meetings and mediations. There will be questions around what this new way of working means for open justice.
[ymal]
Several businesses have offered collaboration tools for free during this period to help with remote working: Microsoft Teams, Google Hangouts and Cisco to name a few, and it is encouraging to see examples of some LawTech vendors on that list too with contract management, online signature and learning and development tools being made widely available.
Investors tend to favour more conservative businesses during a time of economic uncertainty, so the biggest threat to LawTech is the inevitable impact on funding.
Many practice areas are experiencing a lull in work. However other areas, like family law and online crime, are anticipated to see work rise as a result of the lockdown .There will inevitably be less appetite amongst affected legal practices to invest in new LawTech products whilst the focus is on keeping core operations going.
The impact will be disastrous for many LawTech start-ups. We have already started to see LawTech companies like Disco cutting staff. However, products that can facilitate these new ways of working, such as video conferencing service Zoom, will have seen a huge spike in user numbers and shares (Zoom was recently valued at $29 billion.)
The increased need for efficiencies in legal service delivery will continue to draw interest from some investors keen to take the opportunity to buy cheaper shares in the most meaningful LawTech solutions.
The impact will be disastrous for many LawTech start-ups.
It is unclear how long social distancing measures will be in place. When restrictions are eventually lifted, will lawyers revert to the old way of doing things? What will we have learned from this time?
Will some of the formalities currently postponed for virtual hearings, suddenly feel antiquated and unnecessary? Will we see a shift to a more informal, and arguably more accessible, judiciary?
This is an opportunity to consider which areas of legal services really do benefit from the human touch. Some hearings, like jury trials, would surely never work remotely. But it is expected that other matters, like many case management and commercial hearings, will reveal themselves to have transitioned very nicely using remote working technology. Will we see an increase in the use of LawTech to help move as many processes online as required, leaving the face-to-face for essentials only?
We are hopeful that the most worthwhile LawTech products will survive this downturn by adapting to meet customers’ changing needs and continuing to play a crucial part in shaping this new legal landscape.
The process of becoming a lawful permanent resident of the United States can be expensive, stressful, and drawn-out. Unfortunately, there is little to no way around this reality. While you may not be able to expedite the application process, understanding what is required of you and how long it could take can be beneficial.
It can take anywhere from seven to thirty-three months for your green card application to be processed. The amount of time it takes will depend on the type of green card you are applying for, the processing center you use, and other factors.
In most cases, working with an attorney can help to limit the amount of time it takes to process your application. Applying without legal representation can leave you vulnerable to delays and potential denials. You should attempt to learn all you can about the process before applying for a green card.
In general, you can’t speed up the application process time. However, there are steps that you can take to ensure that you have your application processed as quickly as possible. Listed below are a few steps that can reduce the amount of time.
The exact amount of time it takes to process your application will depend on many factors. If you properly execute the tasks that you can control, then you can at least be assured that any delays will not be due to your own fault.
It takes a long time to have a green card application approved. After it is, it will still take a few more weeks to have it mailed to your residence. In the meanwhile, you will be provided with a letter or a passport stamp indicating that you are a lawful permanent resident. It is important to note that green cards must be renewed every ten years unless it’s a conditional green card.
The U.S. government can deny a green card application for several reasons. Some of the most common reasons for a green card application denial or delay include:
Working with an experienced green card lawyer can help to limit your exposure to potential pitfalls in the green card application process. If you have been denied, you may have the option to file an appeal or a motion to reopen your case. You can also start from the beginning and refile your application.
No matter the scenario you choose, you should seek the advice of a proven immigration attorney. They can guide you through the immigration process and greatly increase your chances of a successful application.
According to studies, 1 in 3 Americans aged 18 and over have some kind of criminal record. These records can have serious impacts on the lives of those who have been arrested or convicted. Having a criminal record can complicate your personal, professional, and family life. Criminal convictions can make it difficult for you to get or keep your job, continue or complete your education, and may limit your child custody rights. If you are not a US citizen, then a drug charge will have an impact on your immigration status, as well as any applications you have made to change your status. And, of course, having a criminal charge means that any subsequent charges will be more severe. But with an experienced and successful criminal defense attorney, you may be able to have charges reduced or dropped altogether.
The gun laws in New York and New Jersey are very complex for each state. You can be charged with criminal possession of a gun if you:
What can cause confusion for some people is the fact that you do not need to actually have the gun on you to be charged. This can complicate cases in which someone is charged with possession of a gun they truly did not know was in the immediate vicinity, such as underneath the driver’s seat of a car they’re borrowing. Another reason why someone could be charged with illegal possession of a firearm is when they are driving through and get pulled over in a state where the gun laws are different from their home state. There are a variety of other examples of how someone can be arrested and charged with possession of a firearm, so you will want to speak to an attorney about your specific circumstances. These cases are usually aggressively prosecuted, so you will need a highly experienced and successful attorney.
[ymal]
If you have been arrested with the possession of drugs and/or the intent to sell, then you will need a highly experienced criminal defense attorney representing you. These cases, like gun charges, are aggressively prosecuted. Some defenses for drug charges include procedural errors, unlawful search and seizure, and even mistaking a common substance for an illicit one if they look similar. For example, if you believe your 4th Amendment rights have been violated and that police conducted an unlawful search, your attorney will bring evidence of this to court to argue in your favor.
When you’re going in front of a judge, you want a knowledgeable and experienced attorney representing you. You certainly want to check that they graduated from an accredited law school. While membership in the state or American Bar Association is not required to practice law, it is very difficult to pass and thus is quite a prestigious achievement. You may also want to consider a defense attorney who was previously a prosecutor. The best way to pick a great attorney is to give them a call and schedule a consultation so you can discuss your specific circumstances and concerns.
